This is a BIG deal. iOS already dominates enterprise use (for mobile) over Android, BB and MS. Now they're adding an 800lb gorilla to fill in the gaps and round out their enterprise offerings.

I'm also surprised that IBM is going to exclusively sell iOS devices to their enterprise customers.

I'm curious to know who all inside Apple has been involved with this. From what I saw on IBM's website a lot of these applications were co-designed by Apple and IBM. Plus it sounds like some of this stuff will be announced this fall. Maybe we will hear about it at an Apple event announcing an "iPad Pro". Hmm...

One of the early extensions to Swift could be a CICS interface!

When I worked for IBM providing technical market support for CICS, some said that CICS (Customer Information and Control System) was, in reality an acronym for Consistently Ignore Customer Satisfaction

Ben Riggins is BALR 13ing in his grave

heaven destroyed by an 0C4?

Now, you've done it ... I'll be up all night reading hex dumps.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

I've read practically every one of the comments about this historic partnership but I've seen no mention of the possibility of Apple and IBM teaming up for payment systems. IBM has supplied and supported many large (and small) retail chains with point-of-sale systems (hardware & software) for many, many years and Apple has the motherlode of credit cards on file*. Is it just me or is there a huge possibility that this partnership's dark horse is the Apple payment system that's been rumored and speculated about?

(edit) *...and takes the point-of-sale mobile with iOS.

Hmm...that certainly is intriguing. I hope this deal brings a lot more collaboration. Right now I give the edge to Google Now and Cortana, but Siri/Watson integration would be amazing and would keep Siri competitive.

Even Apple uses Azure servers for iCloud, that's not the issue. The issue is this deal tilts hardware and enterprise software solutions in Apple's favor.

Where I work the only way we can connect an iPad to our network to access applications, network drives, Exchange, etc. is via Citrix remote app and the experience is horrible. I'll be interested to see what this collaboration brings to large organizations entrenched in Windows/Office.

Keynote begins at 8:45 a.m. tomorrow morning. All eyes will be on the elephant in the room. No one will believe a word of the keynote if Satya Nadella doesn't talk about the IBM/Apple deal just fucking up everything.

Again, without even being present, Apple just sucked all the air out of the room. SOMEBODY's gonna stick a mic in Ballmer's face and try to recreate the initial iPhone interview questions... God I miss that guy!

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge

Yeah, simply reformat the Mac hard drive to run Windows only. But that's ok, as long as the computer has an Apple logo on it.

At this point, Apple can discontinue Mac computers and OS X, and people would happily defend the decision. Of course Apple would also make xCode available for Windows so people can continue developing for iPhones and iPads.

Even Apple uses Azure servers for iCloud, that's not the issue. The issue is this deal tilts hardware and enterprise software solutions in Apple's favor.

I don't disagree, I just don't understand. I try hard, but I'm just not that bright...

Let's use my company as an example. In my building we have a couple hundred people using Outlook for all the typical calendar and directory stuff, plus an industry-specific Windows app from Avid for scripts and show line-ups. People in the field, whether in sales or production, already use iPhones.

My plant is one of a dozen across the country that all work the same way, and are all part of a subsidiary of a humungous parent corporation with thousands of employees. The parent corp uses some SAP stuff for finance and management, which trickles down to the managers in a plant like mine but not to front-line people. Anything "corporate" that has to be done by worker bees is handled online.

How does the Apple deal influence my company? I suppose if they wanted to spend millions to replace SAP with IBM it might be relevant, but that would be the case with or without the Apple partnership. As for using iOS hardware in the field, we already do.

So I don't get what is tilted and how? What benefits to my company now exist that didn't before this partnership? Why would an IT manager at my company perceive Apple any differently now than he did yesterday?

If my company is somehow not a good example, what is? What kind of company DOES benefit from this, and how? What does Apple get from this deal that they didn't already have?

Again, I stress that I'm NOT talking down the deal or saying there's no benefit, I'm saying I don't understand what tangible, brass-tacks, "where the rubber hits the road" difference this makes to the huge majority of business on this planet.

Maybe once we see a few of those 100 industry-specific apps it will make more sense. For now, I don't get it.

I don't disagree, I just don't understand. I try hard, but I'm just not that bright...

Let's use my company as an example. In my building we have a couple hundred people using Outlook for all the typical calendar and directory stuff, plus an industry-specific Windows app from Avid for scripts and show line-ups. People in the field, whether in sales or production, already use iPhones.

My plant is one of a dozen across the country that all work the same way, and are all part of a subsidiary of a humungous parent corporation with thousands of employees. The parent corp uses some SAP stuff for finance and management, which trickles down to the managers in a plant like mine but not to front-line people. Anything "corporate" that has to be done by worker bees is handled online.

How does the Apple deal influence my company? I suppose if they wanted to spend millions to replace SAP with IBM it might be relevant, but that would be the case with or without the Apple partnership. As for using iOS hardware in the field, we already do.

So I don't get what is tilted and how? What benefits to my company now exist that didn't before this partnership? Why would an IT manager at my company perceive Apple any differently now than he did yesterday?

If my company is somehow not a good example, what is? What kind of company DOES benefit from this, and how? What does Apple get from this deal that they didn't already have?

Again, I stress that I'm NOT talking down the deal or saying there's no benefit, I'm saying I don't understand what tangible, brass-tacks, "where the rubber hits the road" difference this makes to the huge majority of business on this planet.

Maybe once we see a few of those 100 industry-specific apps it will make more sense. For now, I don't get it.

My workplace is a similar setup to yours, Lorin, although much bigger and it uses ms servers in the backend. We also have staff clamouring for iPhones and iPads as the preferred mobile devices. The IT management is pushing Surface, but to date have only got the VP to test. The line is that it would be just like using the desktop, but also has the benefits of a tablet. I got the IT manager to stand holding his surface (sans keyboard) in one hand and my iPad Air in the other, and after 30 secs he got real shitty.

The point is that Microsoft has been spending time getting its ducks in a row with IT departments to force acceptance of Surface by corporate users. This deal gives the users (and Apple and IBM) a chance to quell this momentum.

Hell has frozen over.. Crows have turned white.. And Steve Jobs is rolling over his grave.

Naww. As others have pointed out, post-MS stabbing their patron, IBM, and using IBM's rep and manufacturing muscle, to grapple Apple nearly to the ground, Apple and IBM have actually had a number of relationships that Jobs was deeply involved in.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by John.B

I couldn't be any more disappointed. Dumping Aperture and joining up with IBM in the same month? Is this why TBWA had to go?

This will do nothing except tarnish the brand Apple worked so hard for so many years to build.

:smh:

You a sad guy. More concerned about an unprofitable niche photography program than Apple's suddenly brighter (as in something distinctly not tarnished) strategic future. :sMh:

Thank you! Yes, that helped some. It included at least some very basic specifics not described elsewhere, like "The apps will target retail, healthcare, banking, travel and transportation, telecommunications, and insurance..."

IBM needs a better mouthpiece than Rometty. Her statement is just two paragraphs of meaningless buzzwords and corpospeak.

I still don't know if this really represents the kind of tectonic shift some people here are expecting though. Cook said iOS devices are already in use at 98% of Fortune 500 companies. That doesn't sound like a product line that needs help penetrating enterprise markets. Obviously it's better to partner with IBM than not, but I don't see this changing the world. That won't happen until we see Macs in Fortune 500 cubicles!

The two barriers that tablets have to replace laptops/desktops is computing power and enterprise software integration. With the A7 Apple has broke through the computing power barrier. A quad core A8 could replace 90% of the laptops/desktops in the workforce right now. With this IBM collaboration they have address the enterprise software integration issue.

Yeah, something like what you posted was triggered in me. Right now, Intel enjoys the privilege of manufacturing CPUs for Apple's desktops. But all the volume is with mobile gear. Lots of companies have old Dells being used for small tasks but everyone wants to bring in their iPads and iPhones.

Intel often hampers Apple's update schedule for their desktop hardware and I'm sure Apple has a long view that perhaps all their stuff should run on Ax chips. We are at the A8 now and perhaps in 5 years, the A14 will be powerful enough to run whatever Apple can make.

Apple would now control it's future completely. iOS and OS would run all the same apps. Enterprise would delink from mobile and we could get excited about Apple desktops joining the party as well.

Maybe most importantly, while I'm commenting on AI, I could at least be making plays on WWF. I hate that I have to take my hands off the keyboard, pick up my iPhone.....................

I still don't know if this really represents the kind of tectonic shift some people here are expecting though. Cook said iOS devices are already in use at 98% of Fortune 500 companies. That doesn't sound like a product line that needs help penetrating enterprise markets. Obviously it's better to partner with IBM than not, but I don't see this changing the world. That won't happen until we see Macs in Fortune 500 cubicles!

Maybe this is a step towards that.

Apple's current role in business is more of a luxury item, IBM's vertical applications will make it more of a necessity.

The difference is between using off the shelves software that are not critical to your business versus using business specific vertical applications that your company can't live without, that every employee has to use every day and all the time.

Here'a an interesting parse/translation of Satya Nadella’s recent message to the troops -- by Jean-Louis Gassée:

Quote:

Satya Nadella’s latest message to the troops – and to the world – is disquieting. It lacks focus, specifics, and, if not soon sharpened, his words will worry employees, developers, customers, and even shareholders.

As I puzzled over the public email Microsoft’s new CEO sent to his troops, Nicolas Boileau’s immortal dictum came to mind:

Whatever is well conceived is clearly said, And the words to say it flow with ease.

...

With all this in mind, let’s see if we can restate Nadella’s message to the troops:

This is the beginning of our new FY 2015 – and of a new era at Microsoft.
I have good news and bad news.
The bad news is the old Devices and Services mantra won’t work.

For example: I’ve determined we’ll never make money in tablets or smartphones.

So, do we continue to pretend we’re “all in” or do we face reality and make the painful decision to pull out so we can use our resources – including our integrity – to fight winnable battles? With the support of the Microsoft Board, I’ve chosen the latter. We’ll do our utmost to minimize the pain that will naturally arise from this change. Specifically, we’ll offer generous transitions arrangements in and out of the company to concerned Microsoftians and former Nokians.

The good news is we have immense resources to be a major player in the new world of Cloud services and Native Apps for mobile devices. We let the first innings of that game go by, but the sting energizes us. An example of such commitment is the rapid spread of Office applications – and related Cloud services – on any and all mobile devices. All Microsoft Enterprise and Consumer products/services will follow, including Xbox properties.

I realize this will disrupt the status quo and apologize for the pain to come. We have a choice: change or be changed.

"In use at" is not the same is "used exclusively by all employees of".

Fair enough. Apple will control the mobile side of any company IBM serves. That's awesome.

It's probably also reasonable to expect that a system from IBM will increase the number of mobile devices in use by their customers. Also good.

I wonder why IBM partnered with Apple for mobile but not the desktop? I'm sure a healthy number of desktops will wind up being replaced by iPads, but desktop machines are still gonna make up the lion's share of hardware in just about any corporate environment (try giving your bean counter an iPad instead of a big screen with a real keyboard and see what happens!). If people were introduced to Macs at work, imagine what would happen to consumer demand!

Apple won't dislodge Microsoft from the enterprise by partnering with IBM. I think the lesson from the past few years is that it takes some kind of disruptive hardware change to dislodge software monopolies. It was the switch from desktop to mobile devices that caught MS flat flooted in the consumer space. It wasn't years of effort on Linux. Likewise in the server room: MS got there in the first place when rack mount commodity servers displaced Big Iron. IBM can win that space back, but they will need some kind of new server room hardware disruption. Not necessarily going back from rack mount to mainframes, but *something*.

IBM probably think that enterprise does not want to remove MS from the server room because of how well it integrates with their corporate desktops. So if they can use Apple to dislodge the desktops, more chance of them getting back in the server room. But this strategy does not seem all that good to me: it's too easy to counter. All Microsoft have to do is launch their own iPad enterprise push. In fact this whole software alliance is the wrong side of the coin. Steve Jobs taught us you don't fight software with software, but with hardware. IBM should be working with Apple's hardware designers (the same ones who just reinvented the workstation) to see what a disruptive new server might look like.

Apple won't dislodge Microsoft from the enterprise by partnering with IBM. I think the lesson from the past few years is that it takes some kind of disruptive hardware change to dislodge software monopolies. It was the switch from desktop to mobile devices that caught MS flat flooted in the consumer space. It wasn't years of effort on Linux. Likewise in the server room: MS got there in the first place when rack mount commodity servers displaced Big Iron. IBM can win that space back, but they will need some kind of new server room hardware disruption. Not necessarily going back from rack mount to mainframes, but *something*.

IBM probably think that enterprise does not want to remove MS from the server room because of how well it integrates with their corporate desktops. So if they can use Apple to dislodge the desktops, more chance of them getting back in the server room. But this strategy does not seem all that good to me: it's too easy to counter. All Microsoft have to do is launch their own iPad enterprise push. In fact this whole software alliance is the wrong side of the coin. Steve Jobs taught us you don't fight software with software, but with hardware. IBM should be working with Apple's hardware designers (the same ones who just reinvented the workstation) to see what a disruptive new server might look like.

You know that IBM sold their Intel desktop and server business to Lenovo right?

You also know that VMWare and Linux are taking on Microsoft in the Data Center.

Surely you know that the IBM deal is not Apple's only angle here.

Microsoft does not have the vertical business applications nor the global support that IBM has.

Microsoft is struggling with its mobile devices that still want to be desktop PCs.

Just wondering, though. Is IBM as skilled as HP in taking some nice innovative outsider's tech and then completely destroy it? Not in this case, IBM just becomes a sales channel for Apple and Apple (iOS) becomes the ultimate front-end for IBMs big data. Seems like a good match.

Apple won't dislodge Microsoft from the enterprise by partnering with IBM. I think the lesson from the past few years is that it takes some kind of disruptive hardware change to dislodge software monopolies. It was the switch from desktop to mobile devices that caught MS flat flooted in the consumer space. It wasn't years of effort on Linux. Likewise in the server room: MS got there in the first place when rack mount commodity servers displaced Big Iron. IBM can win that space back, but they will need some kind of new server room hardware disruption. Not necessarily going back from rack mount to mainframes, but *something*.

IBM probably think that enterprise does not want to remove MS from the server room because of how well it integrates with their corporate desktops. So if they can use Apple to dislodge the desktops, more chance of them getting back in the server room. But this strategy does not seem all that good to me: it's too easy to counter. All Microsoft have to do is launch their own iPad enterprise push. In fact this whole software alliance is the wrong side of the coin. Steve Jobs taught us you don't fight software with software, but with hardware. IBM should be working with Apple's hardware designers (the same ones who just reinvented the workstation) to see what a disruptive new server might look like.

Maybe they could do something with the PowerPC chip

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

You are right. Steve's vision was to make insanely great products, and that is what I meant. But I don't remember him wanting to be the uber-dominating tech company like Bill Gates' Windows everywhere and in everything philosophy. "Stay hungry, stay foolish."- isn't that what underdogs do? Isn't that the point of the "1984" commercial?

You are right. Steve's vision was to make insanely great products, and that is what I meant. But I don't remember him wanting to be the uber-dominating tech company like Bill Gates' Windows everywhere and in everything philosophy. "Stay hungry, stay foolish."- isn't that what underdogs do? Isn't that the point of the "1984" commercial?

/Philosopher mode off

I think it's a matter of validation ... and of circumstances

I think Jobs' NeXT would have done an IBM deal like this.

I don't think Jobs' Apple would have done this.

It is revealing that Cook's Apple has done this!

It'll be fun to watch the ripples in the pond ...

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

The IT guys LOVE IBM reps and tolerate Microsoft reps, so when the IBM reps pulls out his order pad and says," How many IBM/iDevices do you want?" IT will respond with, "How many you got?"

I'm sorry, but this is not always true. As I've seen it, IBM is often seen as cumbersome and overpriced. Their software and hardware tools are seen as very expensive, bloated and not always good, and their reps are often seen as only pushing stuff to get revenue & lock-in, not really interested in what the customer needs. Microsoft often has good relations with larger customers and a close relation, especially when infrastructure is concerned. They are generally trusted by IT.

Apple and IBM are both companies that are in it for the long term : no gimmicks or making a quick buck : both quality operations.

After hearing about this alliance, I can't help speculating as to when the idea was first mooted. Steve Jobs once famously promised to wage thermonuclear war on Google. Could this announcement be the first sign that this war is finally about to break out? To keep up the military metaphor ... could the ranks of Apple and IBM be drawing up in battle formation for the big showdown.

One one side, tried and trusted search algorithms. On the other, the ownership of the mobile human-internet portal * plus a body of knowledge that was gained from very extensive A.I. research.

Aaah ... We live in very interesting times.

*or at least the ownership of the mobile human-internet portal that is used as such and not watching TV programs, playing games etc. etc.

Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster led the chorus of shrugs at news of the pact: "In terms of the benefit to Apple, we do not expect the partnership to have a measurable impact on the model given that Apple has already achieved 98% iOS penetration with Fortune 500 companies and 92% penetration with Global 500 companies," he wrote in a note to investors:

[It] is unlikely to be the make or break factor for a large corporation in utilizing iOS. We note that if half of the Fortune 500 were to each purchase an incremental 2,000 iPhones and 1,000 iPads above what they were planning to purchase as a result of the IBM deal, it would mean about a half a percent to CY15 revenue.